Ashwani Kumar vs North Delhi Municipal ...
2019 Latest Caselaw 3407 Del

$~20
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+       W.P.(C) 7984/2019 & CM APPL. 33178-33179/2019
        ASHWANI KUMAR                                       ..... Petitioner

                           Through       Mr. Abhay Kumar, Mr. Saurabh
                                         Mishra, Mr. Vineet Kumar Singh,
                                         Advocates.
                           Versus

        NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
        AND ORS.                          ..... Respondents

                           Through       Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Standing
                                         Counsel for Nr.D.M.C along with Ms.
                                         Swagata Bhuyan, Ms. Shiva Pandey,
                                         Ms. Rikita Ganju along with Mr.
                                         Naved Khan, Licensing Inspector,
                                         Karol Bagh Zone.
                                         Ms. Nandini Aishwarya, Advocate for
                                         R3 & R4.
    CORAM:
    HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
    HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ASHA MENON
                     ORDER

% 24.07.2019 CM APPL. 33179/2019 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 7984/2019 & CM APPL. 33178/2019 (stay)

1. The present petition has been filed by petitioner praying inter alia for quashing a Circular dated 01.07.2019, issued by the respondent no. 1/ North Delhi Municipal Corporation (in short 'Nr.DMC') stating inter alia that in view of the ongoing pedestrianisation project in and around Karol Bagh, a

survey of the area was conducted on 26.06.2019 and it was observed that 54 tehbazari holders who were allotted squatting/hawking sites at places other than Ajmal Khan Road, were squatting at Ajmal Khan Road without any permission.

2. Mr. Abhay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner finds mention in the impugned Circular at serial no.53 where his present squatting site has been recorded in column 2 as Ajmal Khan Road, the allocated site in column 3 as Bhasin Crockery, Main Ajmal Khan Road and the proposed alternative site in column 4 as Padam Singh Road, MCD Parking, Shastri Park Wall.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an eligible tehbazari holder, who was squatting along the wall of Arya Samaj Mandir, Ajmal Khan Road, Karol Bagh. Later on, he was allocated a tehbazari site opposite Bhasin Crockery, Main Ajmal Khan Road in Category-I. However, possession of the allocated site could not be handed over to him due to objections raised by the Management of a school being run by the Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee. Therefore, he was never relocated opposite Bhasin Crockery.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws our attention to the reply submitted by the Assistant Commissioner, Karol Bagh Zone before the Zonal Vending Committee wherein the status of the petitioner as detailed above, was furnished. He states that the said submissions were recorded by the Zonal Vending Committee in the order dated 13.07.2010 and the petitioner was permitted to squat along the wall of Arya Samaj Mandir, Ajmal Khan Road, Karol Bagh till he would be given possession of an alternative site by the M.C.D. However, the respondent did not provide any

suitable alternative site to the petitioner and resultantly, he continued squatting at the aforementioned site.

5. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that even the alternative site proposed in the last column of the impugned Circular, is not in the control of the respondent/Nr.D.M.C. as the Land Owning Agency is PWD and the said site is also within the non-squatting zone. Therefore, the petitioner has a genuine apprehension that he may be put in an even more precarious position if he moves to the said site on account of objections that may be raised by the Land Owning Agency and the local police.

6. Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Standing Counsel for Nr.D.M.C on instructions received from Mr. Naved Khan, Licensing Inspector, Karol Bagh Zone assures this Court that though the alternate site allocated to the petitioner in terms of the impugned Circular is declared as a non-squatting site, the same had to be allocated to him due to the ongoing pedestrianisation project undertaken by the Nr.D.M.C. at Ajmal Khan Road and for the said reason alone, an exception has been made in the case of the petitioner. She submits that most of the sites mentioned in the last column of the impugned Circular are not under the control of the Nr.D.M.C but they shall ensure that PWD gives a NOC for the said sites and necessary information in this regard is furnished to the respondent nos. 3 & 4/Delhi police so that the petitioner is not harassed or prevented from squatting at the said site.

7. While binding the respondent/Nr.D.M.C. to the assurance given, as recorded above, the present petition is disposed of along with the pending applications. We may note that the above order has been passed limited to testing the legality of the impugned Circular dated 01.07.2019. It shall be open for the petitioner to raise any other dispute w.r.t. the tehbazari site if he

so desires, before the TVC. If a survey is conducted on the directions of the TVC, his absence from the Ajmal Khan Road site will not be held against him.

HIMA KOHLI, J

ASHA MENON, J JULY 24, 2019/MK